Outside the Box

QE and Its Apologists

Options

My friend Tom Bentley sends me political rants every day and then attaches an article from someone. Today’s is from Brian Wesbury, a brilliant economist who packs a thoughtful free-market punch. I mention Tom because I want to also pass on you the note he sent me this morning, introducing Brian. Here’s an excerpt (and Tom’s full note appears below, as a preface to Brian’s piece):

As we continue to suffer under the blizzard of bullshit about everything put out by both sides, and hugely amplified by the media, it’s nice to find a feel-good piece that takes us back to the basics. Much of what Brian writes in the first part are things you have heard from me before. Markets are inherently cyclical and inherently volatile, but they do self-correct before inflicting massive damage. Now you put government in the mix, it zigs when it should have zagged, and all hell breaks loose. Think of it as an airplane in a storm – it bounces around, people grab their air-sickness bags, then the plane lands and all is fine. Now let’s assume the hand of God intervenes and grabs a wing of the plane in an effort to stop the shaking – the wing will break off, and the plane will start it’s death spiral. Think of mark-to-market accounting rules that Brian describes below as the built-in clasp on the wing, then the regulators refused to let go when the banks hit turbulence.

Seriously good economic news has gotten to be something of an outside-the-box commodity, but that’s what Tom and Brian have for us today.

I find myself in a literally freezing Sonoma Valley. Thank goodness the weather app gave me a heads-up, as most of the attendees at this gathering came expecting “California weather.” I am listening to a few of the people who will also be at my conference make private presentations. Powerful. Has me excited.

25 of the world’s top money managers and investment strategists are gathering to discuss how they are positioning their portfolios for the coming market turbulence.

You can watch and listen as they dig deep into the convergence of market-moving events about to hit your portfolio.

Technology has bitten me and I am having to do this intro on my iPad keyboard, typing with one finger. First-world problem. Thinking back 25 years, my choices then would have forced me to be at my office, wielding a pen and yellow pad, and then I’d fax the thing off on my big old clunky fax machine. (Or, if I was on the road, I’d have to pay a king’s ransom to fax.) So I like where we’re going with these technologies. In 10-15 years what we’re doing today will seem so last-century – we forget how fast things are changing, and for the better. It’s no wonder that businesses that “get it” are seeing earnings grow. Those that don’t get it get left behind – creative destruction.

Sidebar: There is going to be more creative destruction in the next decade or two than in all of last century. We are going to have to be able to absorb new ideas and technologies and keep on moving and growing. And do it all over again the next year or even the next month.

It will be the most exhilarating time in history for entrepreneurs and businesses that get it. And difficult for all of us, because central banks and governments will present us with “issues” that will require of us even more creativity – but that’s what free markets and nimble managers are good at.

Lots of moving parts, which will require you to work more and to focus better. Most of us will need an extensive network and trusted sources to help us keep up.

Have a great week. We will talk about inflation and central banks this weekend. I hope to add to your understanding of how it all fits together.

Be the best-informed person in the room
with your very own risk-free trial of Over My Shoulder.
Join John Mauldin's private readers’ circle, today.

Tom Bentley’s introduction:

Brian at his best

As we continue to suffer under the blizzard of bullshit about everything put out by both sides, and hugely amplified by the media, it’s nice to find a feel-good piece that takes us back to the basics. Much of what Brian writes in the first part are things you have heard from me before. Markets are inherently cyclical and inherently volatile, but they do self-correct before inflicting massive damage. Now you put government in the mix, it zigs when it should have zagged, and all hell breaks loose. Think of it as an airplane in a storm – it bounces around, people grab their air-sickness bags, then the plane lands and all is fine. Now let’s assume the hand of God intervenes and grabs a wing of the plane in an effort to stop the shaking – the wing will break off, and the plane will start it’s death spiral. Think of mark-to-market accounting rules that Brian describes below as the built-in clasp on the wing, then the regulators refused to let go when the banks hit turbulence.

During the Obama years, government loved to take credit for putting out a fire that government had started, but truth lies elsewhere. It’s now becoming apparent that our private sector is as strong as it ever was, and still able to kick ass everywhere if we just let it. American business has the secret sauce, and no other country has been able to challenge us at the leading edge (they do kick our ass in the old stuff, like steel and cars). Absorb this: "Corporate earnings are rising rapidly, too, and the S&P 500 is now trading at roughly 17.5 times 2018 expected earnings. This is not a bubble, not even close. Earnings are up because technology is booming in a more politically-friendly environment for capitalism. And while it is hard to see productivity rising in the overall macro data, it is clear that profits and margins are up because productivity is rising rapidly in the private sector.” That last point is important, and will make my friend John smile. Three sectors have been a drag on productivity – housing, education, and medical care – and they have been masking all the gains elsewhere. Even then, medical productivity is way up if we judge by longer, healthier lives, but we have no way to capture the value of that in national aggregates. Keep in mind, part of the reason profits are booming is that the overseas share has been increasing, which explains why profits and stock prices have been able to grow much faster than GDP.

Amidst all that success, the failure lobby is still hard at work: "The sad thing about the story that QE saved the economy is that it undermines faith in free markets.” I explained a few days ago that monetary economics is one step away from voodoo, and the world would be much further ahead if the gold standard were still the norm. But that genie is never going back in her bottle, so we have to live with the modern-day version of children running with scissors (shoutout to Patsy for that one), which is Big Government types and the sycophants they appoint to the Federal Reserve getting seduced by their newfound powers. “Give a mouse a cookie, he’s gonna want a glass of milk…."

QE and Its Apologists

On March 9, 2018, the bull market in U.S. stocks will celebrate its ninth anniversary. And, what we find most amazing is how few people truly understand it. To this day, in spite of massive increases in corporate earnings, many still think the market is one big “sugar high” – a bubble built on a sea of Quantitative Easing and government spending.

While passing mention is given to earnings (because they are impossible to ignore), conventional wisdom has clung to the mistaken story that QE, TARP, and government spending saved the economy from the abyss back in 2008-09.

A review of the facts shows the narrative that “Wall Street” – meaning capitalism and free markets – failed and government came to the rescue is simply not true.

Wall Street was not the driving force behind subprime mortgages. In his fabulous book, Hidden in Plain Sight, Peter Wallison showed that by 2008 Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other government programs had sponsored 76% of all subprime debt – not “Wall Street.” Everyone was playing with rattlesnakes and government was telling them it was OK to do so. But, when the snakes started biting, government blamed the private sector, capitalism and free markets.

At the same time, Wall Street did not cause the market and economy to collapse; it was overly strict mark-to-market accounting. Yes, leverage in the financial system was high, but mark-to-market accounting forced banks to write down many performing assets to illiquid market prices that had zero relationship to true value. Mark-to-market destroyed capital.

QE started in September 2008, TARP in October 2008, but the market didn’t bottom until March 9, 2009, five months later. On that day in March, former U.S. Representative Barney Frank, of all people, promised to hold a hearing with the accounting board and SEC to force a change to the ill-advised accounting rule. The rule was changed and the stock market reversed course, with a return to economic growth not far behind.

Yes, the Fed did QE and, yes, the stock market went up while bond yields fell, but correlation is not causation. Stock markets fell after QE started, and rose after QE ended. Bond yields often rose during QE, fell when the Fed wasn’t buying, and have increased since the Fed tapered and ended QE.

A preponderance of QE ended up as “excess reserves” in the banking system, which means it never turned into real money growth. That’s why inflation never took off. Long-term bond yields fell, but this wasn’t because the Fed was buying. Bond yields fell because the Fed promised to hold short-term rates down for a very long time. And as long-term rates are just a series of short-term rates, long term rates were pushed lower as well.

We know this is a very short explanation of what happened, but we bring it up because there are many who are now trying to use the stock market “correction” to revisit the wrongly-held narrative that the economy is one big QE-driven bubble. Or, they use the correction to cover their past support of QE and TARP. If the unwinding of QE actually hurts, then they can argue that QE helped in the first place.

So, they argue that rising bond yields are due to the Fed now selling bonds. But the Fed began its QE-unwind strategy months ago, and sticking to its plans hasn’t changed a thing.

The key inflection point for bond yields wasn’t when the Fed announced the unwinding of QE; it was Election Day 2016, when the 10-year yield ended the day at 1.9% while assuming the status quo, which meant more years of Plow Horse growth ahead. Since then, we’ve seen a series of policy changes, including tax cuts and deregulation, which have raised expectations for economic growth and inflation. As a result, yields have moved up.

Corporate earnings are rising rapidly, too, and the S&P 500 is now trading at roughly 17.5 times 2018 expected earnings. This is not a bubble, not even close. Earnings are up because technology is booming in a more politically-friendly environment for capitalism. And while it is hard to see productivity rising in the overall macro data, it is clear that profits and margins are up because productivity is rising rapidly in the private sector.

The sad thing about the story that QE saved the economy is that it undermines faith in free markets. Those who argue that unwinding QE is hurting the economy are, in unwitting fashion, supporting the view that capitalism is fragile, prone to bubbles and mistakes, and in need of government’s guiding hand. This argument is now being made by both those who believe in big government and those who supposedly believe in free markets. No wonder investors are confused and fearful.

The good news is that QE did not lift the economy. Markets, technology and innovation did. And this realization is the key to understanding why unwinding QE is not a threat to the bull market.

Get Varying Expert Opinions in One Publication
with John Mauldin’s Outside the Box

Discuss This

Comments

jack goldman

Today, 7:46 p.m.

Who are we bullshitting? Creative destruction? The Dow Index was about 1,000 silver dollars in 1966. Silver dollars cost about $18 to $20 depending what kind. Dow now would have to be 18,000 to 20,000 just to break even. In gold, Dow is down about 1% a year for fifty years. In silver, Dow is up 1% a year for fifty years. It’s a counterfeit currency bubble. We put our wives to work for nothing. Many millions of people bought dogs instead of having real children because we are using debt, counterfeit currency, as money. This drives up the price of EVERYTHING including having a family, taxes, and bank fees. Welfare people have kids for free. Our families are dissolving but that’s okay. We can just import fake families and they can have babies on welfare. It’s “creative destruction”. Wall Street is devouring Main Street. It’s sinister. It’s a planned take over replacing our real money with fake counterfeit currency to fund a fake counterfeit world. The minimum wage in 1966 was $1.25 in silver money. That means minimum wage should be around $18 - $25 per hour to BREAK EVEN with 1966 when one man could support one family. We have witnessed the death of Main Street to prop up and subsidize Wall Street. It’s a rigged game and Wall Street has no skin in the game. Protect yourself. Wall Street NEVER WILL.

bruce.r.chase@gmail.com

Today, 3:44 p.m.

So I am to believe that good old main street capitalism moved along fine without noticing a few trillion thrown its way by virtue of world’s central banks—and main street will not notice a few trillion pulled away from the coffers as well—if only the wicked media had not said anything about it. Without the media, the PE ratios could climb ever higher. Hell, the Russell2K PE ratio could go well above 150 (approximately where it is now) if only the media would shut up.

I feel much better now.

Glenn Taylor

Today, 3:12 p.m.

So Robert Stein is saying that it was government that pushed banks to underwrite all those toxic CDOs and derivatives based on mortgages, too many of which approved based on liar applications, which were written by private mortgage companies and banks who knew a lot of it was junk?

FM/FM may have backed those mortgages but it seems to me that private industry was all to willing to play very loose and fast with the rules when they all knew much of it was junk. They were happy to push the risk onto the public via FM/FM as long as they were making money risk free.

Now I get that had FM/FM not been there to back this stuff, banks would have paid a lot more attention to credit quality but FM/FM has been around for a long time and served a valuable role after WWII and the system worked well for decades so it’s a stretch to say it’s all the governments fault. It takes two to tango.

Maybe I am missing something here as I am far from an expert on this.

Robert Watkins

Today, 2:53 p.m.

Of course I’m no financial expert, but I would like to ask one question. Where did the QE money end up if not in the investment in equities by the top 2%? Remember, the top 2% benefited most during the QE years with everyone else stagnating or becoming even more poor! I personally think there was much causation there! I guess we will see as the Fed unwinds!

Outside the Box is a free weekly economic e-letter by best-selling author and renowned financial expert, John Mauldin. You can learn more and get your free subscription by visiting www.MauldinEconomics.com.

Please write to subscribers@mauldineconomics.com to inform us of any reproductions, including when and where copy will be reproduced. You must keep the letter intact, from introduction to disclaimers. If you would like to quote brief portions only, please reference www.MauldinEconomics.com.

Outside the Box and MauldinEconomics.com is not an offering for any investment. It represents only the opinions of John Mauldin and those that he interviews. Any views expressed are provided for information purposes only and should not be construed in any way as an offer, an endorsement, or inducement to invest and is not in any way a testimony of, or associated with, Mauldin's other firms. John Mauldin is the Chairman of Mauldin Economics, LLC. He also is the President of Mauldin Solutions, LLC, which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states, President and registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, (MWS) member FINRA, SIPC, through which securities may be offered . MWS is also a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) registered with the CFTC, as well as an Introducing Broker (IB) and NFA Member. Millennium Wave Investments is a dba of MWA LLC and MWS LLC. This message may contain information that is confidential or privileged and is intended only for the individual or entity named above and does not constitute an offer for or advice about any alternative investment product. Such advice can only be made when accompanied by a prospectus or similar offering document. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. Please make sure to review important disclosures at the end of each article. Mauldin companies may have a marketing relationship with products and services mentioned in this letter for a fee.

Note: Joining The Mauldin Circle is not an offering for any investment. It represents only the opinions of John Mauldin and Millennium Wave Investments. It is intended solely for investors who have registered with Millennium Wave Investments and its partners at www.MauldinCircle.com (formerly AccreditedInvestor.ws) or directly related websites. The Mauldin Circle may send out material that is provided on a confidential basis, and subscribers to the Mauldin Circle are not to send this letter to anyone other than their professional investment counselors. Investors should discuss any investment with their personal investment counsel. You are advised to discuss with your financial advisers your investment options and whether any investment is suitable for your specific needs prior to making any investments. John Mauldin is the President of Mauldin Solutions, LLC, which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states. John Mauldin is a registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, (MWS), an FINRA registered broker-dealer. Millennium Wave Investments cooperates in the consulting on and marketing of private and non-private investment offerings with other independent firms such as Altegris Investments; Capital Management Group; Absolute Return Partners, LLP; Fynn Capital; Nicola Wealth Management; and Plexus Asset Management. Investment offerings recommended by Mauldin may pay a portion of their fees to these independent firms, who will share 1/3 of those fees with MWS and thus with Mauldin. Any views expressed herein are provided for information purposes only and should not be construed in any way as an offer, an endorsement, or inducement to invest with any CTA, fund, or program mentioned here or elsewhere. Before seeking any advisor's services or making an investment in a fund, investors must read and examine thoroughly the respective disclosure document or offering memorandum. Since these firms and Mauldin receive fees from the funds they recommend/market, they only recommend/market products with which they have been able to negotiate fee arrangements.

PAST RESULTS ARE NOT INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS. THERE IS RISK OF LOSS AS WELL AS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR GAIN WHEN INVESTING IN MANAGED FUNDS. WHEN CONSIDERING ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS, INCLUDING HEDGE FUNDS, YOU SHOULD CONSIDER VARIOUS RISKS INCLUDING THE FACT THAT SOME PRODUCTS: OFTEN ENGAGE IN LEVERAGING AND OTHER SPECULATIVE INVESTMENT PRACTICES THAT MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF INVESTMENT LOSS, CAN BE ILLIQUID, ARE NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PERIODIC PRICING OR VALUATION INFORMATION TO INVESTORS, MAY INVOLVE COMPLEX TAX STRUCTURES AND DELAYS IN DISTRIBUTING IMPORTANT TAX INFORMATION, ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE SAME REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AS MUTUAL FUNDS, OFTEN CHARGE HIGH FEES, AND IN MANY CASES THE UNDERLYING INVESTMENTS ARE NOT TRANSPARENT AND ARE KNOWN ONLY TO THE INVESTMENT MANAGER. Alternative investment performance can be volatile. An investor could lose all or a substantial amount of his or her investment. Often, alternative investment fund and account managers have total trading authority over their funds or accounts; the use of a single advisor applying generally similar trading programs could mean lack of diversification and, consequently, higher risk. There is often no secondary market for an investor's interest in alternative investments, and none is expected to develop.

All material presented herein is believed to be reliable but we cannot attest to its accuracy. Opinions expressed in these reports may change without prior notice. John Mauldin and/or the staffs may or may not have investments in any funds cited above as well as economic interest. John Mauldin can be reached at 800-829-7273.

Thanks for Stopping By!

If you like to educate yourself by hearing many different opinions...

Sign up now for John Mauldin's free weekly e-letter, Outside the Box.

Sign up now for John Mauldin's free weekly e-letter, Outside the Box. Every Wednesday, John will send you a thought-provoking essay from a fellow economic analyst. Some may offend you, some may inspire you—but they all will make you think outside the box.